Dataset Information

Triple lead cephalic versus subclavian vein approach in cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation.

ABSTRACT: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device implantation is associated with severe complications including pneumo- and hemothorax. Data on a sole cephalic vein approach (sCV), potentially preventing these complications, are limited. The aim of our study was to compare a sole cSV with a subclavian vein approach (SV) in CRT implantations with respect to feasibility and safety. We performed a prospective cohort study enrolling twenty-four consecutive de-novo CRT implantations (group A) using a sCV at two centers. Fifty-four age-matched CRT patients implanted via the SV served (group B) as reference. Procedural success rate and complications were recorded during a follow-up of 4 weeks. All CRTs could be implanted in group A, with 91.7% using cephalic access alone. In group B, CRT implantation was successfully performed in 96.3%. Procedure and fluoroscopy duration were similar for both groups (sCV vs. SV: 119?±?45 vs. 106?±?31?minutes, 17?±?9 vs 14?±?9?minutes). Radiation dosage was higher in sCV group vs. SV (2984?±?2370 vs. 1580?±?1316?cGy*cm²; p?=?0.001). There was no case of a pneumothorax in group of sCV, while two cases were observed using SV. Overall complication rate was similar (sCV: 13.0% vs. SV: 12.5%). de-novo CRT implantation using a triple cephalic vein approach is feasible. Procedure duration and complication rates were similar, while radiation dosage was higher in the sCV compared to the SV approach. Despite its feasibility in the clinical routine, controlled prospective studies with longer follow-up are required to elucidate a potential benefit with respect to lead longevity.

SUBMITTER: Vogler J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6286359 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Triple lead cephalic versus subclavian vein approach in cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation.

Vogler Julia J Geisler Anne A Gosau Nils N Hakmi Samer S Willems Stephan S Rassaf Tienush T Wakili Reza R Kaya Elif E

Scientific reports 20181207 1

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device implantation is associated with severe complications including pneumo- and hemothorax. Data on a sole cephalic vein approach (sCV), potentially preventing these complications, are limited. The aim of our study was to compare a sole cSV with a subclavian vein approach (SV) in CRT implantations with respect to feasibility and safety. We performed a prospective cohort study enrolling twenty-four consecutive de-novo CRT implantations (group A) using a s ...[more]

PMID: 30532064

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and aimsIntra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture (IPUS-AVP) for venous access in implantation of transvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is uncommon due to the lack of clinical evidence supporting this technique. This study investigated the efficacy and early complications of IPUS-AVP compared to the standard method using cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) for CIED implantation.MethodsACCESS was an investigator-led, interventional, randomized (1:1 ratio), monocentric, controlled superiority trial. A total of 200 patients undergoing CIED implantation were randomized to IPUS-AVP (n = 101) or CVC (n = 99) as a first assigned route. The primary endpoint was the success rate of insertion of all leads using the first assigned venous access technique. The secondary endpoints were time to venous access, total procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, X-ray exposure, and complications. Complications were monitored during a follow-up period of three months after procedure.ResultsIPUS-AVP was significantly superior to CVC for the primary endpoint with 100 (99.0%) vs. 86 (86.9%) procedural successes (P = .001). Cephalic vein cutdown followed by subclavian vein puncture was successful in a total of 95 (96.0%) patients, P = .21 vs. IPUS-AVP. All secondary endpoints were also significantly improved in the IPUS-AVP group with reduction in time to venous access [3.4 vs. 10.6 min, geometric mean ratio (GMR) 0.32 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.28-0.36), P < .001], total procedure duration [33.8 vs. 46.9 min, GMR 0.72 (95% CI 0.67-0.78), P < .001], fluoroscopy time [2.4 vs. 3.3 min, GMR 0.74 (95% CI 0.63-0.86), P < .001], and X-ray exposure [1083 vs. 1423 mGy.cm², GMR 0.76 (95% CI 0.62-0.93), P = .009]. There was no significant difference in complication rates between groups (P = .68).ConclusionsIPUS-AVP is superior to CVC in terms of success rate, time to venous access, procedure duration, and radiation exposure. Complication rates were similar between the two groups. Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture should be a recommended venous access technique for CIED implantation.

Project description:AimsThe optimum timing of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation is unknown. We explored long-term outcomes after CRT in relation to the time interval from a first heart failure hospitalization (HFH) to device implantation.Methods and resultsA database covering the population of England (56.3 million in 2019) was used to quantify clinical outcomes after CRT implantation in relation to first HFHs. From 2010 to 2019, 64 968 patients [age: 71.4 ± 11.7 years; 48 606 (74.8%) male] underwent CRT implantation, 57% in the absence of a previous HFH, 12.9% during the first HFH, and 30.1% after ≥1 HFH. Over 4.54 (2.80-6.71) years [median (interquartile range); 272 989 person-years], the time in years from the first HFH to CRT implantation was associated with a higher risk of total mortality [hazard ratio (HR); 95% confidence intervals (95% CI)] (1.15; 95% CI 1.14-1.16, HFH (HR: 1.26; 95% CI 1.24-1.28), and the combined endpoint of total mortality or HFH (HR: 1.19; 95% CI 1.27-1.20) than CRT in patients with no previous HFHs, after co-variate adjustment. Total mortality (HR: 1.67), HFH (HR: 2.63), and total mortality or HFH (HR: 1.92) (all P < 0.001) were highest in patients undergoing CRT ≥2 years after the first HFH.ConclusionIn this study of a healthcare system covering an entire nation, delays from a first HFH to CRT implantation were associated with progressively worse long-term clinical outcomes. The best clinical outcomes were observed in patients with no previous HFH and in those undergoing CRT implantation during the first HFH.Condensed abstractThe optimum timing of CRT implantation is unknown. In this study of 64 968 consecutive patients, delays from a first heart failure hospitalization (HFH) to CRT implantation were associated with progressively worse long-term clinical outcomes. Each year from a first HFH to CRT implantation was associated with a 21% higher risk of total mortality and a 34% higher risk of HFH. The best outcomes after CRT were observed in patients with no previous HFHs and in those undergoing implantation during their first HFH.

Dataset Information

Triple lead cephalic versus subclavian vein approach in cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation.

Publications

Triple lead cephalic versus subclavian vein approach in cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets